Stop Right Now Thankyou Very Much

[constantine]

The fact is that when PoE is released, some will play the vanilla game and some 'Sensuki's No-Engagement Mod'.

 

What's the point for any more conflict ?

 

Engagement is making it in the game and there are those who want it and those who don't- each of them having the opportunity to get what they want.

[Gfted1]

I hope he keeps updating the "Unlimited Camping Supplies" mod so it works in the final version of the game.

[Sensuki]

It's not difficult to do Only have to change one variable.

[Lephys]

If you have not figured out why people do not want to play with the Melee Engagement system after the 8 or so threads that it has been discussed in then I honestly don't know what else to say other than use the search function and read them again.

Oh, I've figured out why people don't want to play with it. I just can't figure out why problems = remove instead of problems = fix. No one's really said, yet. Just "'Cause... 'cause it's got problems! O_O"

 

 

Using the ignore function is justified.

If you ignore Lephys, the word count on a page he posted on would probably be less than half.

 

You guys aren't invited to my birthday party. Also, you cannot borrow my Ninja Turtles action figures anymore. u_u...

 

Also, I'm pretty sure the act of ignoring involves not-addressing every post I make, Seari. Just sayin'... *shrug*

[Namutree]

 

 

Using the ignore function is justified.

If you ignore Lephys, the word count on a page he posted on would probably be less than half.

 

You guys aren't invited to my birthday party. Also, you cannot borrow my Ninja Turtles action figures anymore. u_u...

 

 

lol

[Katarack21]

 

Select all->attack must not go so well in the IE games as in PoE. Must be frustrating when your characters die all the time and they don't get up and heal automatically.

To be fair, it's entirely possible to do that in vanilla BG when you're level 3ish and fighting gibberlings and stuff. If course, I play with SCS so that doesn't really apply.

 

Actually, in vanilla BG you can just equip everybody at the beginning with ranged weapons, and select all-->attack mow through almost naything that is in the open. Don't even usually have to kite.

[Osvir]

I haven't read up on this thread, but wanted to throw in a bone into the thread bin:

- BLOOD BOWL, Real-time with Pause Mode. Try it, Obsidian. Might give you lots of insights or inspiration. Homework. 

[Sedrefilos]

I haven't read up on this thread, but wanted to throw in a bone into the thread bin:

 

- BLOOD BOWL, Real-time with Pause Mode. Try it, Obsidian. Might give you lots of insights or inspiration. Homework. 

The "Blitz" mode of Blood Bowl wasn't that succesfull. That's why it isn't implemented in Blood Bowl 2. I never used it after I tried it once or twice and most playthrough vids I've seen was in classic mode.

Edited December 11, 2014 by Sedrefilos

[Lephys]

Actually, in vanilla BG you can just equip everybody at the beginning with ranged weapons, and select all-->attack mow through almost naything that is in the open. Don't even usually have to kite.

Regarding the whole kiting thing. Kiting isn't bad, any more than stunning a foe is bad, or launching a fireball is bad. It's when kiting's stupidly reliable that it's bad. It's a matter of extents. When "how do I go through combat without getting hit, but whilst effectively killing my foes?" is answered with "Just kite, 8D!", that's when it's bad. Or, another way to look at is, if you can start at melee range from something and STILL kite it successfully (reliably, not just in certain situations in which you've actively opened up an opportunity to gain some distance), it's bad. Unless you're playing DOTA or something. Then it isn't.

 

Most of the time, when people grumble about kiting, or bring it up as a problem, they're not talking about the sheer act of maintaining distance from a melee foe. They're talking about the full-health-to-dead strategy of killing everything effectively, with ease, by simply employing movement commands.

[Katarack21]

 

Actually, in vanilla BG you can just equip everybody at the beginning with ranged weapons, and select all-->attack mow through almost naything that is in the open. Don't even usually have to kite.

Regarding the whole kiting thing. Kiting isn't bad, any more than stunning a foe is bad, or launching a fireball is bad. It's when kiting's stupidly reliable that it's bad. It's a matter of extents. When "how do I go through combat without getting hit, but whilst effectively killing my foes?" is answered with "Just kite, 8D!", that's when it's bad. Or, another way to look at is, if you can start at melee range from something and STILL kite it successfully (reliably, not just in certain situations in which you've actively opened up an opportunity to gain some distance), it's bad. Unless you're playing DOTA or something. Then it isn't.

 

Most of the time, when people grumble about kiting, or bring it up as a problem, they're not talking about the sheer act of maintaining distance from a melee foe. They're talking about the full-health-to-dead strategy of killing everything effectively, with ease, by simply employing movement commands.

 

True facts. I was merely making the point that select all is a viable tactic in large chunks of BG. Pretty much anything in the open wilderness for the first half of the game can be taken out by using select all and attack with everybody equipped with bows or slings.

 

The kiting issue that's been brought up was a problem, but not *just* for the reasons people have been discussing. Unmodded and with only the official patches, BG had a serious balance problem with ranged weapons vs melee. Right from the beginning you can kill most enemies before they get near you; this is even successful in the Nashkel Mines and in the Cloakwood Mines. It's only later, as you start fighting groups of powerful enemies in closed quarters where melee and strategy become much more necessary.

 

Heck, I know a guy who beat the entire game using mostly select-all, hotkeys for spells, and no pausing at all (he actually didn't know about the pause feature).

[Hormalakh]

 

Actually, in vanilla BG you can just equip everybody at the beginning with ranged weapons, and select all-->attack mow through almost naything that is in the open. Don't even usually have to kite.

Regarding the whole kiting thing. Kiting isn't bad, any more than stunning a foe is bad, or launching a fireball is bad. It's when kiting's stupidly reliable that it's bad. It's a matter of extents. When "how do I go through combat without getting hit, but whilst effectively killing my foes?" is answered with "Just kite, 8D!", that's when it's bad. Or, another way to look at is, if you can start at melee range from something and STILL kite it successfully (reliably, not just in certain situations in which you've actively opened up an opportunity to gain some distance), it's bad. Unless you're playing DOTA or something. Then it isn't.

 

Most of the time, when people grumble about kiting, or bring it up as a problem, they're not talking about the sheer act of maintaining distance from a melee foe. They're talking about the full-health-to-dead strategy of killing everything effectively, with ease, by simply employing movement commands.

 

I agree with you, though I'd say that being effective isn't the issue; it's a matter of actually having to make a choice that matters. There is no risk/reward with some kiting. But if you risk getting hurt with kiting (the enemies move faster, turning around for your character is slower and allows them to catch you, trying to kite and getting stuck in engagement means that you stuck in position) while the reward is getting off free hits, then the risk/reward calculation is sufficient enough that kiting isn't always the right answer.

 

For example, I'm playing a new Baldur's Gate 1 game with a modification that makes bears run faster. At such a low level, one or two hits from a bear kill my heroes. So while I am kiting individual bears, I know that it's still a risky thing to do - though, still, not too risky - and that challenge makes it fun for me.

Edited December 12, 2014 by Hormalakh

[Osvir]

 

I haven't read up on this thread, but wanted to throw in a bone into the thread bin:

 

- BLOOD BOWL, Real-time with Pause Mode. Try it, Obsidian. Might give you lots of insights or inspiration. Homework. 

The "Blitz" mode of Blood Bowl wasn't that succesfull. That's why it isn't implemented in Blood Bowl 2. I never used it after I tried it once or twice and most playthrough vids I've seen was in classic mode.

I don't know much about that, I just thought the real-time with pause mode has a couple of similarities with PoE's combat, except that it's AoO's are better in Blood Bowl, I suppose. I enjoyed the real-time mode a lot, to be honest. However, the AI are really dumb, and often only move one unit at a time, so touch downs become really easy. But this is off topic, sorry.

[Sensuki]

Regarding the whole kiting thing. Kiting isn't bad, any more than stunning a foe is bad, or launching a fireball is bad. It's when kiting's stupidly reliable that it's bad.

 

There continues to be a plethora of people who find kiting offensive and think that free movement = kiting, and that Melee Engagement is the answer to kiting. It's not, and as proven by many other RT games, the solution to kiting is CC abilities and mobility abilities. That gameplay is waaay more fun than the reverse, as well.

Edited December 12, 2014 by Sensuki

[Lephys]

Well, for what it's worth, I don't think free movement is kiting. I think free kiting is kiting. Using Hormalakh's example of bears, I shouldn't be able to flee from a bear whilst wielding a bow and consistently fire at it while staying out of its range. Just as an example.

 

So, yeah, I've seen ridiculous kiting in many a game, but I don't think that means "make sure no one can ever outrun anything, under any circumstances, and/or effectively remain at range whilst slaying something."

 

Also, I don't think engagement is the solution, but I think it's at least partially a solution, bearing in mind that by "engagement" I mean the concept, and not "everything that's happening in the current build, exactly."

 

I'm with Hormalakh, though. The whole "you can't instantly flee in the opposite direction, 'cause you hafta actually turn around first" notion makes sense as an option for a cRPGs combat movement. But, that's basically just ensuring risk, as he said. Which is kind of the point. The problematic kiting is the "as long as you always just stop, shoot once, and then issue a move command again immediately after that, you're fine! 8D!". Whether it's that, or some increased likelihood of getting hit because you're turning your back on your foe to flee... it functionally amounts to the same thing.

 

That being said, I still think some kind of passive disengagement option would be a tremendously beneficial addition to even the current build, as "all you can do is not-move and be fine, disable your opponent and move and be fine, or move and take an AoO" is a little rigid. I think it should be relatively easy (if you so choose... maybe just for certain builds, etc.) to get away from an engager, just not necessarily free and instantaneous.

 

That's really how I see engagement's goal: It shouldn't be as easy as just moving past someone. And, as far as kiting goes, it shouldn't be as easy as standing around until they reach you, then fleeing just in time to not-get hit, every time.

[Katarack21]

I like engagement as a concept, but there should be abilities and skills that allow you to mitigate, although not get rid of, those engagement issues. Basically I want to at least have the option of building a character who is designed to move about the battlefield with relative freedom, at the cost of other abilities.

[Sensuki]

I'm the opposite, if you want to stop an enemy moving in combat, you should have to ****ing do something about it yourself, rather than the game doing it automatically for you. Not only is that actually what most real time games do, it's more fun.

Edited December 12, 2014 by Sensuki

[Sedrefilos]

I don't play the beta, so I can't have an personal experience/opinion about the subject, but I read the posts in the forums and watch videos reagrding the combat subject because I'm interested in it (not as much as other aspects of the game, but I am nontheless).

I watched all Sensuki's combat videos about exploitations with engagement and other combat mechanics and I've also watched the recent Shevek's relaxed playthrough videos. The subject is argued and argued and argued some more to the point it's exausted and there's no need for further arguing until next build.

 

Of course, the real arguments over the subject are very few in this 13 pages of posts and most people just try to shove their "right" playstyle into other people's faces.
Like this kiting subject for instance. There is no "right" and "wrong" way of playing a single-player game. Get over it. If you don't like a certain playstyle, don't do it. Unless the game doesen't allow you to play some other way, there is no reason to force yourself into a playstyle because it seems the easy way to win a combat. I never kite, for instance, because I don't like kiting. That simple.

 

The discussion should be about mechanics and not playstyles. This is from a backer that doesn't play the beta but wants to be informed about the game's mechanics (and doesn't want to need to search through 13 pages of posts to find the important parts  ).

Edited December 12, 2014 by Sedrefilos

[Osvir]

There is no risk/reward with some kiting. But if you risk getting hurt with kiting (the enemies move faster, turning around for your character is slower and allows them to catch you, trying to kite and getting stuck in engagement means that you stuck in position) while the reward is getting off free hits, then the risk/reward calculation is sufficient enough that kiting isn't always the right answer.

 

Well, for what it's worth, I don't think free movement is kiting. I think free kiting is kiting. Using Hormalakh's example of bears, I shouldn't be able to flee from a bear whilst wielding a bow and consistently fire at it while staying out of its range. Just as an example.

For us that play MOBA's we are very aware of this, of course. Kiting, juking, baiting, ambushing, backdooring etc. etc. all of these things is fair-game in a MOBA game, of course, kiting is a risk because there's a big chance the enemy will catch up to you. Even kiting minion waves often makes the creeps/minions catch up to you (early in the game).

 

Kiting is a "pro-player" action, in essence. But, when you can take down an entire bandit camp (the one, the only, in Baldur's Gate) by kiting all of the bandits in guerilla warfare on any difficulty and win the battle with a single character, then maybe kiting is a bit too overpowered.

 

I don't think kiting in itself is a bad thing, but when it becomes Champion/Hero vs Minion wave difficulty, it's unintuitative, and becomes more of a Dynasty Warriors hack.

 

I wouldn't mind seeing the enemy AI, ranged characters, attempt to kite, or ambush, or backdoor, or juke, or having some "pro-player" actions. The beetles on PotD difficulty do move around a bit more for instance, and I even noticed some dudes hanging back against Medreth (on PotD), as if defending their backline which was pretty interesting and cool to see.

 

Hah, I wonder if in the future it will be possible to hire pro-players to either act out or record enemy AI, just like a pro-voice actor is hired to do voice over I mean, if you want the best AI, wouldn't it be best to copy the best players?

[ISC]

If you don't like a certain playstyle, don't do it. Unless the game doesen't allow you to play some other way, there is no reason to force yourself into a playstyle because it seems the easy way to win a combat. I never kite, for instance, because I don't like kiting. That simple.

 

Overall I very much agree with this post, people seems to ignore the few arguments that are presented and keep posting/questioning opinions.

 

However, it is not that simple. I don't like to ignore the easy way to win a battle because part of my playstyle is about optimization, but I also don't like cheesy, abusive or 'unrealistic' ways to win, because it is also about immersion. What should I do? For me and my playstyle it is obviously preferable and most enjoyable if the devs attempt to limit such tactics. 

[Sensuki]

I don't know why you would kite anyone in the bandit camp in BG1. Equip Full Plate or Ankheg Armor with 18 Dexterity and Girdle of Piercing or Boots of Avoidance and no one there will be able to even hit you most of the time, save for Taugousz Khosann (who I usually charm and get to kill Tazok, hahah I love that exploit).

Edited December 12, 2014 by Sensuki

[Hassat Hunter]

I just noticed in the other thread that Josh has said they'll be adding in "cooldowns" for re-engagement of the same target, along with some other changes.

 

See... I repeat, until they say "Everything's PERFECT! WE LOVE the current system!", I'm going to consider anyone running around and shouting "The sky is falling!" to be an irrational human being.

 

Okay, next up... The UI has some issues... so REMOVE IT!

 

Spell FX... issues... REMOVE THEM! I want invisible spell FX. I just want everyone to wave their hands around, maybe shout some cool words, and then have to check the combat log to even see what happened. 'Cause that's way better than dealing with a system that just so happens to produce unwanted effects currently. u_u...

Return my sarcasm back to me please... :/

Just because IE games had exploitable mechanics, it doesn't mean PoE should too. Spiritual successors are not supposed to bring back the bad sides of the games they pay homage to.

That's the whole POINT. But as one can see, everytime OE tries to take away one of said flaws (like combat XP), there's a mirage of people flocking to bring it back to "IE-standard" and curse OE for steering away.

Same here, they try to fix something broken in IE, and the sollution provided by Sensuki is to just get rid of it, and let IE-flaws run strong again.

 

There's also the obvious very thin line what one might think is 'exploiting' and the other thinks of as 'the way IE is played'... especially if frequent exploiters of the strategy employed.

Most noticable if a MMORPG fixes an exploit and everyone using it going on a massive whinespree, even if really everyone knew it was for the best. 

Wow, the amount of hate Sensuki has been getting for this thread is definitely over the top. I may not always agree with Sensuki's conclusions, but I think it's fantastic that he uses actual game data to make his arguments. I'm personally very happy he challenges Josh Sawyer and the devs on their designs. I think OE is mature enough where they can handle constructive criticism and Sensuki's efforts WILL help to make this game better come full release. I wish more people here would appreciate that.

I agree that Sensuki does a great job, and I *am* glad he's doing his best to rid bugs and issues out of PoE. That is not being disputed.

However, here, on the instance of Melee Engagement, it's gone beyond the call of 'making developers aware of issues' towards a personal crusade to have it completely abolished from the game.

I think I would get slapped pretty badly if I suggested taking blasters out of The Sith Lords for example since 'everyone plays with lightsabers anyway, I don't use it... and the enemy AI can't handle it so let's all give them melee weapons instead'...

 

There's making developers aware of something, and then there's making a dozen threads to 'force' the developers to modify the game in your vision. Personally, I am not very fond of those, I paid OE to make the game they wanted, not the game Sensuki wants.

 

So the sum up; Bug-hunting, issue-reporting and thoroughness yay! This personal crusade nay. Hopefully people will also complain less now how I should not hate upon Sensuki for all he does for the game, while I'm not even doing so...

 

EDIT:

 

 

I don't know why you would kite anyone in the bandit camp in BG1. Equip Full Plate or Ankheg Armor with 18 Dexterity and Girdle of Piercing or Boots of Avoidance and no one there will be able to even hit you most of the time, save for Taugousz Khosann (who I usually charm and get to kill Tazok, hahah I love that exploit).

Not everyone plays like you. You can't expect everyone to have a 18 dexterity build. I know it's a shock people might play IE a different way, but we also need to think about them making PoE, not just the person who played BG(2) so many times they basically have the munckin build for the entire game, and then frown on everyone not having that same outset.

Also good way to prove my point about exploits...

Edited December 12, 2014 by Hassat Hunter

[archangel979]

That's the whole POINT. But as one can see, everytime OE tries to take away one of said flaws (like combat XP), there's a mirage of people flocking to bring it back to "IE-standard" and curse OE for steering away.

Troll attempt 2/10. Try harder please.

[Hassat Hunter]

And thank you archangel for making my point, now with a perfect example added to it.

 

See what happens if one tries to adjust some of those exploitable mechanics?

[Sensuki]

There's making developers aware of something, and then there's making a dozen threads to 'force' the developers to modify the game in your vision. Personally, I am not very fond of those, I paid OE to make the game they wanted, not the game Sensuki wants.

One thread. And I didn't pay for a game with bad combat.

 

 

Not everyone plays like you. You can't expect everyone to have a 18 dexterity build. I know it's a shock people might play IE a different way, but we also need to think about them making PoE, not just the person who played BG(2) so many times they basically have the munckin build for the entire game, and then frown on everyone not having that same outset.

That has nothing to do with what you quoted. For one, you can equip any character with Gloves of Dexterity for a free 18 Dexterity. You can use the character that has a huge AC vs piercing weapons to draw aggro from bandits and unless they get critted (which is averted by Helmets), they will never get hit by any archer. Even without doing that (stacking those items on the same character), Bandits are not hard. Sure, you could kite them, but it was super unnecessary and not even optimal regarding the amount of play time it would take to achieve basically the same or even worse result than using a melee character as a pincushion.

 

Not only that, but Melee Engagement does not even remotely address this issue - Pillars of Eternity has a slower animation for bows and slowed recovery time while moving for ranged units. Even with Melee Engagement removed, kiting with ranged weapons is a dumb idea.

 

I've tested it myself without the Engagement system. Using a ranged character to try and kite an enemy melee unit. The animation speed and the slowed recovery time pretty much means that on your first 'kited' shot, the melee enemy will either nearly catch you or be able to hit you, and the second kited attack is pointless. With the Engagement system they get a free hit (which can happen on the very same frame as their normal attack) if you try and move away - which is completely ****ing retarded IMO.

 

Also good way to prove my point about exploits...

 

How is that an exploit? Is something that remotely has anything to do with the player putting 2 and 2 together and getting an advantage for something an exploit to you?

Edited December 12, 2014 by Sensuki

[Malekith]

Hassat Hunter, on 12 Dec 2014 - 3:03 PM, said:See what happens if one tries to adjust some of those exploitable mechanics?

They introduse new exploitable mechanics, while making the whole game worse?

Edited December 12, 2014 by Malekith